Essay: Impact of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO Act)

Academic & Professional Skills Assessment:
Research Report:
Legal Issues Whether the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO Act) was necessary legislation to bring into force, the reasons for this act and the consequences that this act has had on the government and the public.
Conclusion This act was not necessary to be passed in terms of legal aid and funding, the cuts have had a severe impact on society. However, it has made other important amendments to our legal system that have had a positive impact. For example, amendments on bail to better protect the victims and the community.
Advice N/A
Applying the Law to The Facts The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO Act) was passed to modify funding in civil and criminal proceedings. Furthermore, it has made amendments to the sentencing of offenders, bail and new offences have been created under this act. This act was passed by the coalition government and this act abolished the previous categories for legal aid set out in the Access to Justice Act 1999 . The role of legal aid has now been moved to the Lord Chancellor and the Legal aid agency.
The main reasons for this act were due to the overbearing amount of cases courts had to deal with. However, according to the legal aid statistics from July to September 2018, there are still numerous applications for exceptional case funding. For example, 745 submissions which are a 17% increase from the same months last year.
This act had a huge effect on the public as the number of cases legal aid is available for has been extremely restricted. The qualification for civil legal aid is stated in LASPO s11 . Legal aid is no longer available for certain cases such as immigration, debt, employment and people argue that this is a violation of human rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 6 ECHR . Legal advice companies such as Amnesty international also state this may be a breach of our human rights.
Likewise, there have been many cases in relation to this act from funding not bring provided or problems with legal aid. For example, R v secretary of state of justice 2015 is an example of funding not being available for
a criminal trial and whether this was compatible with Human Rights.
There have also been disputes about justice as this act may hinder our treatment in the courts and we may be treated unfairly. As only certain cases are now allowed legal funding this could be discrimination and only exceptional cases are allowed in particular areas of the law.
On the other hand, The LASPO Act has made huge improvements to the criminal justice system, such as bail. Adding the ‘no real prospect test’ to ensure offenders are still treated justly. It has also made exceptions in domestic violence cases, this could be argued as improving the protection the public against criminals. Similarly, sentencing has been amended and this act has added new offences, this suggests the law is
becoming stricter on criminals.
Methodology
I used LexisLibrary to find appropriate statues and cases, by typing keywords into the legislation box. For example, ‘Legal Aid’ led to the finding of the LASPO Act. (https://www.lexisnexis.com) accessed 8th January 2019
Gov was also used to find further information about acts and to find statistics on legal aid.
(http://www.legislation.gov.uk ) accessed 8th January 2019
The ECHR website helped find the meaning of Article 6. (https://www.echr.co.int ) accessed 8th January 2019
Halsbury’s laws of England (2015) Vol 65
Halsbury’s Laws of England (2015) Vol 11
Updating I have used electronic resources which are continuously updated, and I have checked that there are no further relevant points of law by searching through databases which are significant to this area of law.
Time Taken Overall, the research trail and essay took eight hours.
Essay Question:
In this essay I am going to discuss the impact of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO Act) on the legal system and whether this piece of legislation was necessary to be passed. The main issues that arose when this act was passed were the consequences that it had on legal funding and thus the effect this had on society. The LASPO Act 2012 was introduced by the government with one of the aims being to decrease funding for legal aid drastically, this act also amended other areas of the law such as; bail, sentencing and offences, even creating new ones. In other words, it abolished the categories for legal aid that were set out in the Access to Justice Act 1999 .
Legal Aid is free legal assistance that is funded by the government using public funds. Since this act was passed, there have been severe cuts in legal aid. This is because the government felt that legal aid had expanded too much and was available for an extensive amount of cases. This led to problems in the courts as cases were being brought to court when they did not need to be and in some cases, the courts are not able to give the best remedy to the problem. For example, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) may have been a better alternative. Moreover, the government felt that the public may have been taking advantage of this funding and using it when it was not entirely necessary in certain cases. Another reason for this act being passed, in particular in legal aid cuts was due to the coalition government as they wanted justice to be ‘simpler’ by resolving disputes without going to court and they felt this would help society. They felt legal aid should only be given to those who really need it and only used when entirely necessary.
Similarly, there have been some severe consequences of this act, especially on the public, particularly on people that are suffering or dealing with cases that need legal aid assistance. For example, people are now unable to access free legal advice in certain areas of the law as this act has narrowed the number of areas that legal aid can be given for. Funding is no longer available for education, private family cases, medical negligence and many more but these are all still vital areas of law. Now, this act has been passed, many people may have to result in borrowing money and therefore getting into debt as they now have to pay for legal advice in some cases or not be granted it. This could be a form of discrimination against underprivileged people as this act has affected disadvantaged individuals the most.
Likewise, another argument that arises is this act may interfere with people’s justice and that they are not being treated fairly. A real-life example is the Hillsborough victims in the ‘Hillsborough disaster’ who watched their families be crushed, and the majority of the victims used free legal aid to create cases. If this had occurred again now or something similar, they could not use legal aid as it is not granted for personal injury cases anymore. The courts only allow funding to be given in exceptional cases under the exceptional case funding (ECF) scheme in categories that have now been eliminated. The case of R (on the application of S) v Director of Legal Aid Casework and another 2017 show people arguing that LASPO is ‘systematically’ unjust and unreasonable, but the courts once again ignored this and disagreed. However, the court did acknowledge that there were ‘difficulties’ within the system in the judgement of the case.
This may also concern Human rights as this could also be a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6 right to fair trial. People may not be able to have a just trial if they do not have the legal funding to support them. In the case of R v Lord Chancellor the Supreme Court held that this act was biased in terms of the funding cuts in the immigration sector. Therefore, this act may be discriminatory and also hinder our right to fair trial. Another case example is Regina (Tirkey) v Director of Legal Aid Coursework and another 2018 in this case a woman was trafficked into the UK and was able to bring a claim against them. This was due to legal funding. However, this case was only allowed as it was an exceptional case which is stated under LASPO s10 .
The main concern of this act is the consequence it has had on young people, especially those who are self-contained. These young people not only have to suffer from this, but it is shown that the majority deal with mental illness or unemployment. The just rights campaign shows that 75,000 young people will be left without access to legal advice which can have a detrimental effect and influence on their general wellbeing and future. It has also had an effect on companies that offer free legal aid and advice, such as the Citizens Advice Bureau. They explain that there is still such a high demand for free legal advice, but the cuts make it impossible to support every case. This explains why there is an unmet need for legal services.
However, this act has helped the legal system as it has supported the courts by decreasing the number of cases that need to be brought to court. This allows courts more time to deal with more complex cases and also supports the public in reducing the amount of time waiting for a court hearing. According to the Gov, the Ministry of Justice statistics, the workload of cases has dropped by 4% in criminal cases in January to March 2017. This shows that reducing legal aid has reduced the number of cases in court and therefore the workload. But is this figure too low? Nevertheless, I feel that this is the only real advantage of the legal funding cuts. For instance, only 54% of Exceptional Case Funding applications were granted.
Personally, I feel this act was unnecessary in terms of funding as it has put a severe strain on individuals that need to bring cases to court but do not have the necessary funds. The eligibility of cases has been strictly narrowed and the negative consequences of the legal aid cuts outweigh the positives. I feel this act has no regard for society and is only concerned with money. The reduction in funding is still unclear as to what sector the money is being used for now. On the other hand, this act has allowed amendments to be made to the criminal justice system, this suggests other aspects of this act are beneficial such as the sentencing of offenders and new offences are being created. Also, the alterations to bail which have improved the protection of the public especially in domestic violence cases. Also, the case of Jonathan Vass 2010 provoked the amendment of the right of appeal to prosecution for bail. This act has helped many departments of criminal proceedings but refused to acknowledge the effect of funding cuts in the civil justice system.
In Conclusion, I feel this act was not necessary to be passed in regard to funding and legal aid. It has put an unnecessary strain on the public, companies and even legal professionals. Narrowing the number of cases legal aid is available for has had a destructive and damaging impact on the legal system and left so many people in a vulnerable position. I feel it interferes with our access to justice and several cases and people are not treated fairly due to this act.
Bibliography:
Statutes
The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act 2012
The Access to Justice Act 1999
The Human Rights Act 1998
Cases
R (on the application of Henderson) v secretary of state for justice [2015] All ER (D) 212 (Jan)
R (on application of the public law project) v Lord Chancellor [2016] UKSC 39
*Regina (Tirkey) v Director of Legal Aid Casework and another [2018] 1 WLR 2112
R (on the application of S) v Director of Legal Aid Coursework and Another [2017] 2 All ER 642
Websites
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/764302/legal-aid-statistics-bulletin-jul-sep-2018.pdf
https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=55JM-GYP1-DYCN-C3YF&csi=274768&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/files/aiuk_legal_aid_report.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228890/8072.pdf
https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=55JM-GYP1-DYCN-C2BT&csi=274768&oc=00240&perma=true&elb=t
http://justrights.org.uk/sites/default/files/The%20effect%20of%20LASPO%20Act%202012%20on%20children%20and%20young%20people.pdf
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/the-impact-of-laspo-on-routes-to-justice-september-2018.pdf
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/639278/legal-aid-statistics-bulletin-jan-mar-2017.pdf
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/news/documents/laspo-4-years-on-review/
*All accessed 8th January 2019*
Articles
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1320451/Paramedic-Jonathan-Vass-jailed-killing-nurse-Jane-Clough-hospital-car-park.html accessed 8th January 2019
Journals
Jan Miller The New Law Journal (2018) 168 NLJ 7811, p4 (3) ‘Law society voices concerns over legal aid crisis’
Andrew Higgins Oxford Journal of Legal studies (2017) 37 (3): 687 ‘The cost of civil justice and who pays?’